141–150 of 590 posts
And what is Microsoft going to do with this purchase? Seriously, Microsoft is buy all these game studios and fail to utilize them probably. They own all the IP required to do a followup to Fallout New Vegas and NOTHING.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He won’t continue working after this year, like you said. Microsoft can’t magically make his equity disappear.
I think the problem is the optics of allowing him to continue working a single day after Microsoft takes over. It sends a message that it's okay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft doesn't have anything close to a monopoly on games. In terms of sales and reviewer scores, most of the top games weren't produced by Activision or other Microsoft studios. The only recent release I'm aware of was Starfield, and that was panned for failing to meet expectations, achieving under 88 on Metacritic.
> Microsoft doesn't have anything close to a monopoly on games. The whole monopoly argument doesn't work, we'll just end up with duopolies, or perhaps triopolies. See iOS vs Android. What we need is an adjustment of the rules, where e.g. the top 10 companies instead of the top 1 company are treated as a monopoly from an antitrust point of view. This will give consumers more to choose from.
I don't think we're anywhere near close to that in the videogame industry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But Sony having some real competition is a good thing. Sony has a bad tendency of anti-consumer tendencies in their gaming space when they are the leader and they get cocky. They did it with the PS3 and they are repeating some of that with the PS5 generation. I'm curious about which "anti-consumer practices" Sony is responsible for, that Microsoft isn't. So far it seems to me that Sony did acquire some gaming studi…
This one was pretty bad: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk...
God damn man. How is this not an antitrust violation? The only answer is that we live in truly corrupt times. What is our answer to this?
Microsoft doesn't have anything close to a monopoly on games. In terms of sales and reviewer scores, most of the top games weren't produced by Activision or other Microsoft studios. The only recent release I'm aware of was Starfield, and that was panned for failing to meet expectations, achieving under 88 on Metacritic.
Why not just merge all nasdaq 100 and be done with it?
And what is Microsoft going to do with this purchase? Seriously, Microsoft is buy all these game studios and fail to utilize them probably. They own all the IP required to do a followup to Fallout New Vegas and NOTHING.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Focusing on one asshole getting undeserved rewards is one thing, but it distracts from the real story. What hurts way more at scale is the increasing monopolistic power of Microsoft Games. That should be the primary focus of everyone's attention. This weakens Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Epic. The consumer. Everyone but Microsoft. Microsoft can give away "experiences" under-cost and sink a lot of human attention into it. T…
> increasing monopolistic power of Microsoft Games Microsoft has never been #1 in gaming. It's always been playing catch-up. There's nothing even remotely close to "monopolistic". That doesn't make any sense at all. You literally can't be a monopoly if you're not #1. This is Microsoft simply trying to complete better against Sony. Which is a good thing. It benefits the consumer as stronger, more equal competition lea…
> Xbox is preparing to join other major games publishers in raising the prices of its major new first-party titles from $60 to $70. https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-raising-prices-new-fi...
Bobby Kotick will remain as CEO until the end of 2023 and get a huge check for this purchase. He's getting rewarded for building a toxic, fratboy workspace, sexually and psycologically harassing women. I wonder if Microsoft can be held accountable for allowing a sex predator like him to continue working.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Focusing on one asshole getting undeserved rewards is one thing, but it distracts from the real story. What hurts way more at scale is the increasing monopolistic power of Microsoft Games. That should be the primary focus of everyone's attention. This weakens Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Epic. The consumer. Everyone but Microsoft. Microsoft can give away "experiences" under-cost and sink a lot of human attention into it. T…
Sony has behaved in an identical manner for years. Nintendo refuses to do anything that makes them NOT a hardware company, and so they will continue to languish on last-generation hardware. Steam is doing just fine. Microsoft sells games on Steam because it made business sense for them to do so. Epic has good first party titles but they give away two games a week and it has never moved the needle for me because (a) S…
Nintendo does not consider Microsoft and Sony to be competitors. What they absolutely do not want to do is operate like the other guys, who have quite varied interests because the companies are not 100% focused on gaming.
It's hard to argue with Nintendo's staying power. Of course, their methodology is not always consumer friendly.